I agree with the prime concern of the City Council and Budget
Committee. No one wants to reduce city services! We can all agree on
that. Having said that, what happens when the money runs out? What do we do then?

At its current rate of spending, Troutdale's city staff acknowledged it only has enough money in reserves to maintain existing service levels for a couple of years. In the 2012-2013 budget document, city staff wrote,

"The
adopted budget maintains the necessary unappropriated balance of about
$2,000,000 to meet the operational needs of the City between July 1st
and November before property taxes receipts arrive. Dropping
below that level could require the City to borrow money to meet the
operating needs and could potentially also reduce the bond and credit
rating of the City. The adopted budget uses $338,000 of the reserves
above that level to maintain existing service levels. The reserves
would enable the City to sustain service levels for the next couple of
years, consuming reserves at this modest rate."

In spite of the city's precarious financial position, other than token budget cuts of around $30,000 for the
2012-2013 budget,
neither the city's Budget Committee or the City Council seemed
interested in reducing the city's deficit spending.

I agree with the prime concern of the City Council and Budget
Committee. No one wants to reduce city services! We can all agree on
that. Having said that, what happens when the money runs out? What do we do then? PERS costs will go up. Health insurance costs will go up. City revenues could diminish even further.

This is not a problem that just came up out of the blue sky. I've written several
times about Troutdale's budget problems here, and here, and here, and here. The question remains- what do we do when the money runs out?

No one wants to reduce city services, but what do we do when the money runs out?